ThomasT said:
Is it possible to relate the hypothesized dark energy of the universe with the CMB wavelength?
As Marcus implied, the CMB temperature map can indirectly tell us something about dark energy, here's why:
The CMB has almost the same temperature anywhere you look in the sky, but there are 0.001% deviations (e.g. in one patch of the sky, T=2.731 and in another patch, T=2.732). Standard calculations say that the average size of a lot of these temperature fluctuations corresponds to structures (known as acoustic oscillations) that had a certain (calculated) size about 400,000 yrs after the Big Bang.
So the next question you should ask is: "What determines the angular size of these structures?" That is, what says how big they should look to us? It turns out that the angular size of these structures depends on the expansion history of the universe, which in turn depends on the stuff in the universe: matter and dark energy. (The expanding universe causes something to look bigger than it would in a static universe.)
A variety of methods have shown that all the normal matter and dark matter that we can detect does not give the right expansion history of the universe that is in concordance with the CMB temperature variations. But, when you throw in the amount of dark energy that the supernova results give, that gives you the right expansion history of the universe! In other words, with dark energy, the calculated angular size of those early universe structures is close to the actual observed angular size of the temperature variations.
In other words, the CMB temperature variations give us a yardstick (with a length that we know) to look at. The angle that the yardstick subtends (i.e. how long it looks) depends on how much matter, dark matter, and dark energy there is in the universe. In the end, the CMB data meshes nicely with the supernova data regarding dark energy.